Pa ge 1 INDEXED IN Pa ge 1 American Journal of Arts and Human Science (AJAHS) Reservation for Janajati in Nepal’s Civil Service: Analysis from Intersectional Lens Puspa Raj Rai1* Volume 1 Issue 1, Year 2022 ISSN: 2832-451X (Online) DOI: https://doi.org/10.54536/ajahs.v1i1.257 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs Article Information ABSTRACT Received: May 05, 2022 Accepted: May 12, 2022 Published: May 13, 2022 Nepal promulgated affirmative action or reservation policies for women, indigenous na- tionalities, and other groups to increase representation in the Civil Service. The reservation policy was made based on the assumption of Janajati (ethnic) as a unitary entity. Not all Janajati groups are the same economic, political, and social conditions. There are no gov- ernment studies relating to under-representation and over-representation in Civil Service within Janajati groups. In this context, this paper provides answers to questions about which Janajati groups benefited more from the reservation policies in Civil Service. Is there a male creamy layer or a female creamy layer? Moreover, what is the situation of representation of Janajati based on the categorization of the Nepal government? This paper explores the rep- resentation of the Janajati in Civil Service after the implementation of the reservation policy. The paper argues that the provision of the reservation is more favorable for the advantaged Janajati group than the most marginalized Janajati group. Similarly, it is more favorable for male Janajati than female Janajati within the same group, thereby potentially reproducing social inequality within the Janjati in Nepal Keywords Reservation, Janajati. Civil Services. Creamy layer. Social inequality, underrepresentation, overrepresentation, intersectionality 1 Department of Sociology, Patan Multiple Campus, Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Nepal * Corresponding author’s e-mail: raipusparaj@gmail.com INTRODUCTION Nepal is now a more inclusive state by making constitutional provisions for equality and justice after Janandolan (people’s movement) I and II. The corrections to past exclusionary practices were made by the state by adopting inclusive policies for equal access to power, resources, and opportunity. Reservations or affirmative actions were made the major tools of an inclusive policy by the Government of Nepal. Some Government initiatives include the reservation of excluded and marginalized groups in education, politics, bureaucracy, and other sectors. The government to increase the representation of indigenous nationalities in the Civil Services of Nepal has promulgated affirmative actions or reservation policies for women, and indigenous nationalities among others. The unitary lens played a crucial role in the systematic emergence of social inequality in the past. Still, a reservation policy was made based on Adibasi-Janjati as a unitary entity, all are the same conditions. Therefore, it is time for the evaluation of reservation policies from an intersectional lens and not repeat past actions. Not all indigenous nationalities are in the same conditions of economic, political, social, etc. but multidimensional and intersectional inequality and oppression within Adibasi- Janajati are given less priority in the academic discourse and state’s policies and plans. There is no government study of underrepresentation and overrepresentation in the Civil Service within Adivasi-Janajati. Thus, this paper tries the answering these questions, particularly concerning who was more benefited from the reservation policies in Civil Services within the Adibasi-Janajati group? Is there a male creamy layer or a female creamy layer? What are the representative situations of Adibasi- Janajati based on the Nepal government’s categorization of five-fold groups? This paper explores the unequal representation of Adibasi-Janajati and marginalized groups of the Adibasi-Janajati representation situation in Civil Service after the implementation of reservation policies. Statement of the Problems Korten (2011) believes that reservation is providing rightful sharing of power, resource, and opportunity to a marginalized community. Reservation policies further increase the discrimination in the society and it is against the principle of equal treatment by a state as well (Pojman, 2010) and affects the merit-based selection (Chalam, 1990). Reservation policies have both consequences like promoting equality and producing inequality in society. If it is properly implemented with an analysis of multidimensional, intersectional differences, and the crosscutting dimension of the excluded group, will reduce inequality and make equilibrium. But, it is not properly implemented with an analysis of multidimensional, intersectional differences and inequality of excluded groups, which will produce inequality and make disharmony. Previous studies related to representation and Gurung (2006), DFID and World Bank (2007), Bhatta et al. (2008), and Onta et al. (2008), have reported underrepresentation. These studies concentrated more on Janajati as a single entity and group. Batta et al. (2008) analyzed the intergroup inequality of Janajati representation in higher education based on the NFDIN classification of Janajati. Some researchers like CDSA (2014) presented the Nepal Social Inclusion Index as encompassing six different dimensions and 39 indicators. Bennett (2005) in ‘Gender and Social Exclusion Assessment’ described women across all categories irrespective of caste, ethnicity, individuals https://doi.org/10.54536/ajahs.v1i1.257 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs mailto:raipusparaj@gmail.com Pa ge 2 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs Am. J. Arts. Hum. Sci. 1(1) 1-10, 2022 with disabilities, or children. Six categories, based on sex, caste, ethnicity, region, religion, and physical condition, have been listed as excluded groups. Toffin (2007) suggested that the establishment of quotas is not only caste or tribe wise, but also based on economic criteria. The poorest including a marginalized group who were the most disadvantaged benefitted from it and not the creamy layers from the so-called backward categories. Pradhan (2014) argued that multiple categories of class, gender, caste, and region, multiple levels of oppression, and discrimination affected social inclusions and exclusions. An intersectional lens can be a tool to break down a one- dimensional understanding of inequality and oppression. Dhakal (2013) analyzed the reservation policy in Civil Services and observed that there has been increased representation of some marginalized communities but has created some controversies. It may continue to be under the domination of a limited elite group even within the excluded groups. Nakarmi (2067 B.S.) showed that inequalities and exclusion persist within the Newar ethnic group. Not all Newars were living in the same condition and situations and there are vast differences between them. The study focused more on intra-group inequality and criticized the previously existing knowledge on Newar. Paudel (2016) evaluated the reservation policy of Civil Service in Nepal and concluded that the government could not recruit the disadvantaged groups and the trend of recruitment has remained the same as before. Elite family members enjoyed more reservation opportunities with family members who were already absorbed in the Civil Service. It appears that the existing knowledge is not sufficient for the analysis of reservation policy for Nepal’s Civil Services and an intersectional perspective on Janajati for representation in the Civil Service becomes a necessity. From the above, the following research questions are generated: i) What is the magnitude of intergroup representation of Janajati in Civil Services? ii) What is the level of gender-wise representation Janajati in Civil Services? iii) What is the level of region-wise representation of Janajati in Civil Services? iv) What is the intragroup representation of Newar in Civil Services? Objectives of the study The general objectives of the present study are to examine the representation of Janajati in the Nepal Civil Service after adopting reservation policies. The specific objectives are as follows: * To examine the magnitude of intergroup representation of Janajati in Civil Services. * To explore the level of gender-wise representation of Janajati in Civil Services. * To analyze the level of region-wise representation of Janajati in Civil Services. * To find out the intragroup representation of Newar in Civil Services. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY This paper is based on explorative and descriptive research. The nature of the data is quantitative. This paper is based on data obtained from the Central Offices Public Service Commissions. The weekly Bulletin of the Public Service Commission was downloaded from the website. Published results of different years, were passed and recommended candidate names are listed, and were collected based on the Janajati group name that is in turn based on 59 lists of Adibasi-Jaanjati and NFDIN classification into five categories of Adibasi- Janajati from 2065 till 2072 (Nepal calendar year). For the intra-group analysis, representation has been taken from the Newar ethnic group from Hill Janajati, which is the high representation in the Civil Service of Nepal. The reason behind the selection of these groups is solely being the highest representation from their region. There were problems with caste identification concerning Babal, Rajlaw, Behang, Kashiawa, Yongya, Ji.Ti., Chidi, Sartungi, Bal, Phaujdar, Khadka, Kawar, Mungmen, Charkole, Rumba, Gachhadar, Kusmi, Kathariya, Thanet, Linthep, Mahatara, Bhadra, Bakhariya and Sahani as these groups could not be identified to which ethnic group they belong. These have been listed as an unidentified group. During the last ten years, 3286 total Janajati are found to have entered into the Civil Service. These names have been classified based on ethnicity, gender, region, entry type, rank, and service areas. Data were collected from the published literature and government websites. Data have been analyzed and have been presented through tabulation, diagrams, and charts and discussed accordingly. Reservation in Civil Service Governance Reform Program (2001-2005) for the first time in Nepal proposed quota reservations for marginalized people. A High-Level Reservations Committee was formed in December 2004, which prepared a report and made recommendations for the adoption of affirmative action in Nepal. The chart below shows the percentage of various ethnic groups in Nepal. Figure 1. Distribution of reservation seats for civil service The Second Amendment of the Civil Service Act, 1993 of Nepal was passed by the Cabinet in July 2005. It made provisions to recruit 45% of the employees on an inclusive basis. Of these, 33% of the seat was reserved for women, 27% for the Adibasi-Janajati, 22% for Madhesi (Terai people), 9% for the Untouchables, 5% for disabled and the rest 4% for backward areas. The first inclusive advertisement was published in 2007. Intergroup Representation of Janajati There were 59 ethnic groups in Nepal. Out of them, http://https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs Pa ge 3 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs Am. J. Arts. Hum. Sci. 1(1) 1-10, 2022 only 29 ethnic groups were represented and 30 ethnic groups were not represented until now. Out of the total number (3,286 persons), communities like Newar, Rai, and Sunuwar were overrepresented as compared to the percentage of the total Janajati population based on the 2011 Census. The Newar was more than double (968; 29.46%) overrepresented by their population percentage. Rai represented (429; 13.06%), Sunuwar represented (35; 1.07%) in Civil Service. Rests of the ethnic groups were underrepresented in Nepal’s Civil Services after implementing the reservation policy. After ten years, Magar’s representation was significantly better than others (610; 18.56%), but lay underrepresented compared to their population percentage. The Tharu (501; 15.25%) occupied the third position but it was also underrepresented. Thus, 21 ethnic groups accounted for less than 1 percent in their representation. Similarly, Tharu and Tamang were underrepresented (264; 8.31%). Nearly, Gurung (115; 3.5%), and Limbu (112; 3.41%) were represented almost equally (Table no. 1). Table 1. Intergroup representation of Janajati in Civil Service Nepal compared with population. S.no. Type of Janjati Percentage in total population of Janajati (CBS 2011) Representation Num-ber Representation Percent-age 1 Surel 0.26 1 0.03 2 Hayu 0.03 2 0.06 3 Majhi 0.9 19 0.58 4 Dhanuk 2.37 29 0.88 5 Chepang 0.73 1 0.03 6 Jhagad 0.4 2 0.06 7 Thami 0.3 1 0.03 8 Bote 0.11 1 0.03 9 Danuwar 0.9 16 0.49 10 Baramo 0.09 1 0.03 11 Sunuwar 0.6 35 1.07 12 Tharu 18.74 501 15.25 13 Tamang 16.61 264 8.03 14 Bhujel 1.28 26 0.79 15 Kumal 1.3 9 0.27 16 Rajbanshi 1.24 20 0.61 17 Gangai 0.39 1 0.03 18 Dhimal 0.28 5 0.15 19 Darai 0.18 3 0.09 20 Dura 0.05 5 0.15 21 Limbu 4.17 112 3.41 22 Newar 14.26 968 29.46 23 Magar 20.36 610 18.56 24 Rai 6.9 429 13.06 25 Gurung 5.88 115 3.5 26 Sherpa 1.21 27 0.82 27 Yakkha 0.26 1 0.03 28 Jirel 0.06 10 0.03 29 Thakali 0.14 8 0.24 30 Unidentified 0 64 1.95 Total 100.00 3286 100.00 Source: Fieldwork, 2075 B.S. Of the total Janjati (3286), 2138 (65.06%) males and 1148 females (34.94%) represented in Nepal’s Civil Services after the adoption of the reservation policy in Nepal. Newar, Rai, Magar, Tamang females were less represented than male’s representation. In Newar 60.33% were male and 39.66% were female; in Rai 52.28% were male and 41.72% were female. Magar females accounted for 28.85% and males accounted for 71.15 %. In Tamang. Thakali, Sherpa, Jirel, Dura, Chepang, and Gurung, females were represented more than the males. Females were only represented in Yakkha, Gangai, and Chepang, similarly, only males were represented in Jhagad, Surel, Bote, Thami, Darai, and Hayu. Unequal representation in intergroup Janajati shows that there was persisting gender inequality in the representation of Civil Services. Relatively well representation in gender equality was found in Gurung, Kumal, and Rai (Fig.2). Entry type of representation is an important dimension; there are four types of entry in Civil Service. Out of the total, entry type of Janajati reservation quota, Janajati quota consisted 2165 (65.61%), the second position occupied by open entry type (755; 22.97%), third entry type was Mahila (330; 10.05%), Madheshi and Disabled group were followed by respectively (Figure 3). http://https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs Pa ge 4 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs Am. J. Arts. Hum. Sci. 1(1) 1-10, 2022 Figure 2: Intergroup representation of Janajatis by sex Figure 3. Intergroup representation in civil service of Janajatis by entry type Table 2: Intergroup representation of Janajati in Civil Service by rank Ethnicity 1st class 2nd class 3rd class NG1 NG2 NG3 Nonclass Surel 0 0 0.17 0 0 0 0 Hayu 0 0 0 0.10 0.07 0 0 Majhi 0 0 0.52 0.81 0.55 0 0 Dhanuk 0 0 0.52 1.00 1.09 0 0 Chepang 0 0 0 0.10 0 0 0 Jhagad 0 0 0 0.10 0.07 0 0 Thami 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.98 Bote 0 0 0 0 0.07 0 0 Danuwar 0 0 0.17 0.20 0.82 4 0 Baramu 0 0 0.17 0 0 0 0 Sunuwar 9.09 0 1.39 1.00 1.02 4 0 Tharu 0 4.27 6.94 17.26 17.00 12 31.37 Tamang 0 2.56 5.90 8.88 9.34 4 3.92 Bhujel 0 0.85 0.87 0.30 0.96 0 2.94 Kumal 0 0 0 0.10 0.55 0 0 Rajbanshi 0 0 0.17 0.50 0.96 0 0 Gangai 0 0 0 0 0.07 0 0 Dhimal 0 0 0 0.10 0.07 0 0 Darai 0 0 0 0.10 0.27 0 0 Dura 0 0 0 0.10 0.14 12 0 Limbu 0 1.71 4.17 3.23 3.28 4 4.90 Gurung 9.09 4.27 3.65 3.73 3.35 4 0.98 Magar 0 4.27 14.41 15.34 23.50 16 21.57 Rai 18.18 0 11.11 11.81 15.23 8 20.59 Sherpa 0 0 0.35 0.81 1.16 0 0 Yakkha 0 0 0 0 0.07 0 0 Jirel 0 0 0.17 0 0.55 4 0 Newar 63.63 77.77 46.35 32.09 18.17 28 12.75 Thakali 0 1.71 0.35 0.10 0.20 0 0 Unidentified 0 2.56 2.60 2.22 1.64 0 0 Total Percent 100(11) 100(117) 100(576) 100(991) 100(1464) 100(25) 100(102) Source: Fieldwork, 2075 B. S. Tharu is represented by all entry types. Some ethnic groups were represented by three entry types, Newar, Magar, Gurung, Limbu, etc. Baramu, Bote, Thami, Dhanuk, Hayu, Surel, and Gangai were only represented http://https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs Pa ge 5 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs Am. J. Arts. Hum. Sci. 1(1) 1-10, 2022 by one type of entry which was the Janajati quota. It seems that certain ethnic groups were more benefited from the reservation. If the reservation system was not introduced then they would go unrepresented in the Civil Services. Newar occupied 46.04 % of Janajati quota, the second position was Magar, which was 22.26%. Tharu was 14.29% represented in Janajati’s quota. Rai represented 12.34%. Tharu was also represented by Madhesi quota, 95.24% entered from Madhesi quota among Janajati. Better representation was of Newar and Rai ethnic groups in Mahila (female) quota. There was vast inequality in the representation according to rank; rank is power, prestige, and economic benefit. So lower rank representation was not a good symbol of representation. The following table (table 2) shows the intergroup representation of Janajati in Civil Service by rank. Table 2 shows that Sunuwar, Gurung, Rai, and Newar were only represented in 1st class rank. It is the top position in the Civil Service. 63.63% Newar was represented as 1st class officer, Rai was 18 %, and Gurung was 9%. Newar accounted for 77.71% as 2nd class officer, with Magar and Gurung being equally represented in 2nd class officer, which was 4.27%. Most marginalized ethnic groups had not been represented as 2nd class and 3rd class officers. They were only represented in junior rank. Jirel, Yakkha, Bote, Jhagad, Chepang, and Dhimal are represented at the non-gazetted officer level. Thami ethnic group only one represented as non-class rank. Gender-wise Representation of Janajatis Gender disparities are also observed in the ranks and service sectors. Female representation was lower than males in all ranks except 1st class, NG3 then 2nd class, 3rd class officer, non-gazetted 1, 2, and 3rd. In the 1st class, the female percentage was 54.55%, the male percentage was 45.45%, and the lower representation was in the 2nd class. Female representation in 3rd class NG1, NG2,and non-class respectively were 26.91%, 28.56%, 42.28% and 15.69%. (see Fig. 4). The non-gazetted third (NG3) was found only female. Only female candidates compete in Mahila Sahayak (NG3) rank (fig. 4). Figure 4: Gender inequality of Janajatis by rank Figure 5: Gender-wise representation of Janajatis by Service sectors. Figure 6: Gender-wise representation of Janajatis by region. Figure 7: Gender-wise representation of Janajatis by entry type. There are fourteen sectors of service such as administration, judicial, agriculture, miscellaneous, etc. Only women candidates can apply for miscellaneous services like Mahila Vikas Adhikrit (women development officer) and Mahila Sahayak (women assistance) thereby increasing the female representation. Female representation was more in heath service as Anami, Staff nurse. Female representation in the health service sector and accounting services was better than in other sectors. Males dominated other service sectors like administration, fiscal planning, etc. The miscellaneous sector was also better for females. The Majority of Janajati females (60.35%) represented in health service, 57.14% of females represented in the accounting service sector, and 52.38% of females represented in miscellaneous services (Fig. 5). Gender inequality was found by region and service entry type. There were four categories of the region and five categories of entry types. Comparatively, gender inequality regarding representation was higher in the Tarai region than in mountain and hill regions. About 57.66% of males and 42.34% of females were represented in the mountain region, while 37.51% of females and 23.55% of females were represented in the hill and Tarai regions respectively. There were gender inequalities in all regions regarding representation in Civil Services (Fig. 6). In the analysis of entry type, the figure shows that Janajati male’s representation was higher (80.52%) than Janajati females (19.48%) from the Janjati quota. In the open entry type, female representation (53.25%) was better than male Janjati (46.75%). The Madhesi quota was also overrepresented by male Janajati (80.95%), while the female Janajati percentage was only 19.05 %.( Fig. 7). Region-wise Inequality in Representation of Janajatis Of the total representation of Janajati, 1st class consisted 3.1 percent, 2nd class consisted 3.56%, 3rd class consisted 17.53%, NG1(non-gazetted first) 30.16%, NG2 (non- http://https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs Pa ge 6 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs Am. J. Arts. Hum. Sci. 1(1) 1-10, 2022 gazetted second) 44.55%, NG3 (non-gazetted third) 0.76%, and non-class consisted of 0.33%. The NG2 and NG1 ranks were found dominant positions in Civil Service. Hill Janajati were over-represented in all ranks as hill Janajati accounted for 100 percent in 1st class, 88.8% in 2nd class, 83.68 % in 3rd class, 72.55% in NG1, 68.99% in NG2, 80% in NG3, and 65.69% in non-class. Tarai Janajati were not represented in 1st class. Their representation accounted for 4.27% in the 2nd class, 7.81% in the 3rd class, 19.37% in non-gazetted first (NG1), 21.04% in NG2, 16 percent in NG3, and 31.37 percent in non-class. Mountain Janajati were lower in all ranks and positions, their population was lower than others (Fig. 8). Figure 8: Region-wise representation of Janjatis by rank Figure 9: Region-wise representation of Janajati by entry type. Figure 10: Region-wise representation of Janjatis by service sectors. Figure 10: Region-wise representation of Janjatis by service sectors. Figure 11: Representation of Janajati based on NFDIN classification by rank Regional disparities were found in entry type and services sectors. Hill Janajati held the highest position on Janajati quota, open, women quota, and disabled quota. Hill Janajati occupied 73.33% of Janajati seats, of the 73.25% covered in the open quota, and 83.33% covered in the women quota. The Tarai Janajati held the second position, which accounted for 17.49% of the Janajati quota, 18.41% in open, and 8.79% of the women quota. Thus, the Janajati quota was represented by hill Janajati and the women quota also covered hill Janajati women among the Janajati group (Fig. 9). Hill Janajati held the highest position in all service sectors. Hill Janajati occupied 81.83% in administration, 80.52% covered in judicial services, and 94.74% covered in foreign affairs services, in comparison to Tarai Janajati, which accounted for 12.55% in administration, 11.69% in judicial, and 5.28% in foreign affairs service (Fig. 10). Hill Janajati held the highest position in all service sectors. There were disparities among Janajati based on NFDIN classification. There were five categories of Janajati under this classification. Of the represented total Janajati, the Advanced group consisted 29.70%, the Disadvantaged group was 39.68%, the Marginalized group percentage was 26.45%, and the Highly marginalized group was 2.13%, and the Endangered group was 0.09%. The representation of females from the Endangered group was nil. Advanced group females occupied 39.98%, followed by the Disadvantaged group, which occupied 37.5%, Marginalized group female representation was 28.88%, and Highly marginalized group female was 11.43%. Male was predominantly represented in all groups, but comparatively, their representation was found higher in the Advanced group and Disadvantaged group (Fig. 10). The advanced group held the highest position on higher levels of officer position including 1st class, 2nd class, and 3rd class. Of the total Janajati, the advanced group comprised 63.64% as 1st class officers, 79.49% as 2nd class, 46.7% in 3rd class, 32.09% in NG1, and 18.37% in NG2. The Disadvantaged accounted for the second position as high-level officers including 1st class, 2nd class, and 3rd class. The disadvantaged group comprised 27.27% in Civil Service as 1st class, 10.26 % in 2nd class, and 33.85% in 3rd class (Fig. 11). There were 14 service sectors, where Janajati representations comprised unequally. Representation of the Marginalized group was found better in three sectors like accounting service, agriculture, and nontechnical service. Marginalized groups occupied 71.43% in accounting, 29.58% in agriculture, and 31.63% in nontechnical services. Disadvantaged group participation was the highest in most of the service sectors. The disadvantaged group occupied 47.7% in administration service, 44.16% in judicial services, 43.37% in agriculture, 66.67% in parliament, 42.11% in foreign affairs, 41.10% in health, 43.88% in nontechnical, and 51.81% in integrated services. The advanced group occupied 24.48% in administration service, 22.08% in judicial service, and 22.45% in agriculture (Figure 12). http://https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs Pa ge 7 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs Am. J. Arts. Hum. Sci. 1(1) 1-10, 2022 Figure 12: Representation of Janajati based on NFDIN classification by service sectors Figure 13: Gender wise inequality in representation among holding top ten position sub-castes of Newar Intragroup Inequality in Newar Newar was over-represented in all sectors of the state and polity, including education (Gurung 2006, Bhatta et.al 2008). In this research, Newar was found predominantly represented than other Janajati in Civil Service. However, Nakarmi (2066 B.S.) argued that vast inequality was persisting within Newar. Not all sub-castes were of the same condition and status in all sectors, Newar high caste representation was very well in comparison to other underrepresented caste groups. He concluded that Newar does not cover a single blanket term; various sub-castes within the Newars are differently excluded and exploited. The unequal representation of the sub-caste of Newar in Civil Service has been illustrated in table 3. There were only 37 Newar sub-castes represented. Out of the total Newar representation (968; 29.46%), Shrestha comprised the highest percentage (64.88%) followed by Maharjan 6.31%, Manandhar 4.34%, Pardhan 3.82%, Shakya 3.1%, Dangol 2.17%, Parjapati 1.65%, Bjracharya 1.55%, Joshi 1.45%, and Tamrakar 1.03%, rest of other sub-castes accounted for only below 1%. Some sub- castes were not yet represented in Civil Services. Gender inequality was also found within the Newar sub-castes in terms of representation in Civil Service. Females occupied 100% of Newar sub-castes like Nakarmi, Kakshapati, Khadgi, and Chitrakar. Similarly, males occupied 100% of Suwal, Pradhnang, Malla, and Bajimaya. Male and female equal representation (1:1) was found in Malakar, Bijukchhe, Maske, Tamrakar, Silpakar, and Manukarmi. Female representation was better than males in Rajbhandari (66.67%), Tuladhar (66.67%), Ranjit (66.67%), Bjracharya (66.67%), Lakhe (60%), Joshi (57.14%), and Manandhar (52.39%). Similarly, male representation was better than females in Newar sub-caste Tandukar (80%), Amatya (66.66%), Shrestha (63.37%), Pardhan (62.10%), and Dangol (61.9%) (Fig 13). Shrestha sub-caste held the highest position on a higher level of officer position including 1st class, 2nd class, 3rd class. Of the total Newar group, the Pardhan and Shakya held an equal percentage (14.28%) in 1st class officer rank. Maharjan held the second position in 2nd class and 3rd class officer. Shrestha representation was the highest in all ranks, 74.48% in NG1, 82.78% in NG2, and 100% in NG3. Maharjan representation was higher in non-gazetted 1st class and non-gazetted 2nd class. Manandhar consisted of 7.79 % in the 2nd class,5.78% in the 3rd class, 3.79% in NG1, and 4.5% in NG2 (See Figure 14). Table 3: Intragroup inequality in Newar by sub-castes of Newar in Civil Service by subcaste S. no Subcaste of Newar Representation Number Percentage 1 Shrestha 628 64.88 2 Tamrakar 10 1.03 3 Nagarkoti 3 0.31 4 Manandhar 42 4.34 5 Bajracharya 15 1.55 6 Ranjit 3 0.31 7 Maharjan 65 6.71 8 Desar 5 0.52 9 Pardhan 37 3.82 10 Bajimaya 4 0.41 11 Amatya 3 0.31 12 Shakya 30 3.1 13 Karmcharya 7 0.72 14 Tuladhar 3 0.31 15 Joshi 14 1.45 16 Parjapati 16 1.65 17 Dangol 21 2.17 18 Maske 4 0.41 19 Rajbhandari 9 0.93 20 Malla 1 0.1 21 Manukarmi 2 0.21 22 Pardhanang 3 0.31 23 Suwal 6 0.62 24 Silpkar 6 0.62 25 Bijukcche 2 0.21 26 Nakarmi 1 0.1 27 Lakhe 5 0.52 28 Napit 1 0.1 29 Talchabhdel 1 0.1 30 Kapali 1 0.1 31 Chitrkar 1 0.1 32 Tandukar 5 0.52 33 Malakar 2 0.21 34 Gubhaju 1 0.1 35 Singh 7 0.72 36 Khadgi 2 0.21 37 Kakshpati 2 0.21 Total 968 100 Source: Fieldwork, 2075 B. S. http://https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs Pa ge 8 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs Am. J. Arts. Hum. Sci. 1(1) 1-10, 2022 Figure 14: Newar intragroup representation inequality in Civil Service by rank Reproduce Social Inequality by the Reservation Policy The quota of five groups provided by the Civil Service Act, 1993 made by the Government of Nepal has not been able to make real inclusion of excluded groups. It has been found that certain groups have been excluded due to unequal participation within the Janajati. As the inclusion in the civil service has given more representation to certain Janajati groups, the reservation system has again excluded other Janjati groups. The main reason for this is to implement a reservation policy by the state treating all the Janajati equally socioeconomic status. MoGA & UNDP stated that all inclusion policy based on the intersection of intergroup inequality, otherwise inclusion may be a mistake (2013). Nepal’s Government made the mistake of framing the reservation policy due to ignoring the inequality within Janjati. Nepal Federation of Indigenous Nationalities (NEFIN) and the National Foundation for Development of Indigenous Nationalities (NFDIN) classified Adivasi and Janjati into five categories based on their socio- economic status. Its main purpose is the effective representation of the most backward and disadvantaged Janjati groups (2004). NEFIN stated the reservation should be based on the fivefold categories of Janjati. Endangered Janjati groups need more reservation quotas than other Janjati groups. Some Janjati groups are highly advantaged in education, political and economic sectors than other Janjatis. The classification proves that there is exist vast inequality in the Janajati. Similarly, DFID & World Bank found that there are many disparities among different Janjati groups (2007). The state directly ignored inequality among Janajati groups and made the reservation policy Janjati a single equal group. The main mistake was done by the state in formulating the reservation policy like Newar and Thakali Janjatis was to keep them on par with other Janjatis in the reservation policy. The endengered Janajati groups like Bankariya, Kusbadiya, Raji, Kisan, Raji etc. may not take advantage from the reserved seats. The more affluent Janjatis taking advantage of the reservation has created a kind of inequality among the Janjatis. This type of inclusion has made it easier for Janajati candidates from the upper strata of the classification of Janjati to enter the civil service. However, it has been difficult for the candidates belonging to the lower strata groups to enter the civil service. Janjatis’s allegations that the Brahmins and Chhetris are still high represented and high benefited in the civil service are likely to change. Now the elite Janjatis will be highly represented and more benefitted than disadvantaged and highly marginalized Janajatis in the civil service with high participation. This process systematically reproduces social inequality among the Janajati groups. McCall argued that social inclusion is based on the framework of intersectionality. There are multiple dimensions of social exclusion, that are addressed in social exclusion (2005). Neupane (2000) stated the Janjatis’ participation in government institutions like the judiciary, constitutional bodies, cabinet, public administration, legislature, political party leaders, local government, industry, education sector cultural organization, science and technology, civil society based on Janjati as a single group. The ignorance of multidimensional factors of exclusion also leads to social inequality among Janjati groups. Tamang () argued the marginalized Janjatis remain unrepresented or underrepresented. High representation is found in Newar, Gurung, Limbu, Rai, Sherpa, and Thakali. The representation of the Nepal Government failed to address the multiple dimension of social exclusion and ignored the intersectionality approach, that produce social inequality among Janjatis. The creamy layer Janajatis are more benefitted from the reservation policy in civil service. MoGA & UNDP mentioned that the Lohani Committee recommends using the human development index for introducing excluded groups and proposed the reservation should be low-income women, low-income Adibashi Janjatis, low-income Madheshis, low-income Karnalibasis, low-income Dalits, Low-income persons with disability and other low-income persons (2013). Class-based reservation avoids the various dimensions of exclusion. Janjatis were historically intersected various dimensions of social exclusion. Gender-based exclusion also needs to be analyzed for a better understanding the Janjati inclusion in civil service in Nepal. Gender inequality is found in the above analysis within the Janajati groups. Janajati female representation in the civil service is lower than male Janjati. All Janajati women are not the same in socioeconomic conditions. There is also found that disadvantaged women still have not taken benefit from the reservation policy. The current reservation policy is not favorable for the most marginalized Janjati women. It may create gender inequality among Janajati groups and within Janajati groups. It is only favor of creamy layer Janajati men and women. It may be the product of elite Janjati’s men-dominated groups that will be colonized Janajati communities in Nepal. CONCLUSION The representation of Janajati in Civil Service has improved significantly but Janajati is still underrepresented as per the proportion of their quota, that is, 27%. The reservation quota is less than 7% since their total representation is 20.6%. Inequality still exists between and within Janajati groups. There exists http://https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs Pa ge 9 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs Am. J. Arts. Hum. Sci. 1(1) 1-10, 2022 unequal representation between males and females. The intragroup inequality still exists among the Newars. Based on the fivefold classification of Janajati, the Advanced group and Disadvantaged groups are more benefitted than the Marginalized groups, Highly Marginalized groups, and endangered groups. Reservation has not benefitted the Marginalized people, and a certain creamy layer of ethnic groups, hill ethnic groups, and males from ethnic groups have benefitted most. Newar, Rai, and Sunuwar are overrepresented. Gender-based inequality exists in ranks, service types, and entry types among all the ethnic groups. Unequal representation of males and females regarding interethnic groups, and region-wise show gender inequality in the reservation system. All Janajati are not equally deprived and marginalized, having different intersectional inequality and crosscutting issues so it should be interpreted through an intersectional lens. Not all are covered under the single blanket as Janajati. If the state provides an effective and real reservation, it should take a policy of reservation within the reservation for highly marginalized people. Nevertheless, reservation is more effective only for the elite section from within the ethnic groups that reproduces inequality within Janajati. But, the reservation policy could not properly address an analysis of multidimensional, intersectional differences and inequality of excluded groups, which produces inequality and make disharmony among Janajati groups. Nepal Government should quickly review the reservation police in civil service. It is time for the lawmaker to change some provisions in favor of the most marginalized Janajati groups, especially the most marginalized Janajati women. The reservation policy is reproducing social inequality among Janajati and between Janjati men and women. It reproduces the domination of elite Janajati groups. Nepal’s government should give serious attention to such a problem. The policymaker and planner should be done highly rigorous research on this issue and should make a plan not only unitary but apply the framework of intersectionality for reservation of Janajati in the civil services. Reservation should be directed toward the endangered and highly marginalized Janajati and should concentrate on the intragroup inequality of Janjati like Newars. REFERENCES Bennett, L. (2005). Gender, caste and ethnic exclusion in Nepal: Following the policy process from analysis to action. Paper presented to Arusha Conference, New Frontiers of Social Policy, December 12-15, World Bank Bhatta, Pramod, L. Adhikary, M. Thada& R. Rai (2008). Structure of denial of student representation in Nepal’s higher education. Studies in Nepal History and Society, 13(2): 235-263. (Mandala Book Point: Kathmandu). Central Department of Sociology/Anthropology. (2014). The Nepal multidimensional social inclusion index: Diversity and agenda for inclusive development. Central Department of Sociology/Anthropology, Tribhuvan University: Kathmandu. Chalam, K. S. (1990). Caste reservations and equality of opportunity in education. Economic and Political Weekly, 25(41):2333-2339. (Sameeksha Trust: India). DFID & World Bank (2007). Unequal Citizens: Gender, caste and ethnic exclusion in Nepal (summary). DFID & World Bank: Kathmandu. Dhakal, D. (2013). Analyzing reservation policies in Civil Service of Nepal. Paper presented to Professor Nobuhiro Hiwatari as a requirement for the course on International Political Economy (Case Study) at GraSPP, the University of Tokyo. Gurung, H. (2006). From exclusion to inclusion: Socio-political agenda for Nepal. Social Inclusion Research Fund: Kathmandu. Korten, D. C. (2011). Globalizing civil society: Reclaiming our right to power. Seven Stories Press: New York. McCall, Leslie. (2005). The complexity of intersectionality. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 30(3): 1771-1800. MoGA & UNDP. (2013). Inclusion in civil service: Issues and initiatives. Kathmandu: Ministry of General Administration and UNDP. Nakarmi, S. S. (2066 B.S). Newarbhitrko saaikshika smanta ra sambeshikaranko bahas. Studies in Nepali History and Society,15(1):145-169. (Martin Chautari:Kathamandu.). Nakarmi, S. S. (2067). Sambesikaran bhitrako samabeshikaran: Newar samudaya bhitrko samajika smantako bisleshan. Contemporary Journal of Sociology and Anthropology,1(143-159).(Sociology/Anthropology Department, Patan Multiple Campus: Lalitpur). NEFIN (2004). ‘Classified Schedule of Indigenous Nationalities of Nepal’, prepared by the Janajati Classification Task Force and approved by the Federal Council of NEFIN, March 1. Neupane, G. (2000). Nepal ko Jatiya Prasna: Samajik Banot ra Sajedhari ko Sambhawana. Kathmandu: Centre for Development Study. Onta, P., H. Maharjan, D. R. Humagani and S. Parajuli (2008). Sambeshi media (eds.).Martin Chautari: Kathamandu. Pardhan, M. S. (2014). Perspective on multiple dimensions and intersections in Social Inclusion. In Perspective on social inclusion and exclusion in Nepal. Om Gurung, Mukta S.Tamang and Mark Turin, eds. pp38-56. Central Department of Sociology/Anthropology, Tribhuvan University: Kathmandu, Nepal. Paudel, N. J. (2016). Inclusive governance: A case study of Civil Service in Nepal. South Asian Youth Research Institute for Development. (Online Version). Pojman, L. P. (2010). The case against affirmative action. International Journal of Applied Philosophy, 12(1), 97-115. (Philosophy Documentation Centre: United States). Tamang, M. S. (2014) Perspective on social inclusion and implications for research in Nepal. In O. Gurung, M. S. Tamang & M. Turin (eds.) Perspective on Social Inclusion and Exclusion in Nepal. pp.11-37, Kathmandu: Central Department of Sociology/Anthropology. http://https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs Pa ge 10 https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs Am. J. Arts. Hum. Sci. 1(1) 1-10, 2022 Toffin, G. (2007). Affirmative action from a sociological and comparative Perspective. A Paper presented at International Seminar on ‘Constitutionalism and Diversity in Nepal’ Organized by Center for Nepal and Asian Studies, Tribhuvan University: Kathmandu. http://https://journals.e-palli.com/home/index.php/ajahs